Justification of the second amendment , page 1

reply to post by toocoolnc

---

Yep.

the beauty of the second amendment is it will not be needed until they try to take it.- good ole Thomas Jefferson

I don't own a gun but I like having my right to own one.



And it does seem, when my rights are slowly being stripped away, I'm not doing anything about.

I need to take action and start a little community rally of some sort.
Has been brought to my attention that is not a Thomas Jefferson quote .....sorry

Originally posted by natalia
reply to post by toocoolnc

---

Yep.

the beauty of the second amendment is it will not be needed until they try to take it.- good ole Thomas Jefferson

I love the quote, but

The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it. Falsely attributed to Thomas Jefferson; first reported in Matt Carson, On A Hill They Call Capital: A Revolution Is Coming‎ (2007), p. 131. Not found prior to 2007.

Still a good quote though.

reply to post by toocoolnc

---

I think it goes farther than that. Personal responsibility. Personal responsibility for your safety, the safety of your family, your property. Without firearms, all responsibility for your safety rests soley within the state.

The last thing I want to do is "bumper sticker" this thread, but one does ring true.

"When seconds count, the police are just minutes away."

reply to post by beezzer

---

Personal responsibility until you shoot the wrong person, or the person becomes the wrong person after the fact, or the person gunning for you has bigger guns and more ammo, or...the possibilities of a "you lose" situation are pretty much endless. Well, I suppose you can keep upping your supply and firepower too, but then you have to ask yourself "Doesn't this look like the USA/USSR arms race?"

Wouldn't it just be better to address the issues at hand that have created this air of insecurity? Build your community spirit to new highs, higher than ever before in the history of mankind. Really love your fellow man, not just your fellow Americans. Create a government you can trust. What's the point of having one if you're completely left out of anything good from it?

It's time to think about what you're leaving your grandchildren. It's not just about the here and now.

Originally posted by CosmicEgg
reply to post by beezzer

---

Personal responsibility until you shoot the wrong person, or the person becomes the wrong person after the fact, or the person gunning for you has bigger guns and more ammo, or...the possibilities of a "you lose" situation are pretty much endless. Well, I suppose you can keep upping your supply and firepower too, but then you have to ask yourself "Doesn't this look like the USA/USSR arms race?"

Personal responsibility encompasses all aspects of ones actions for better or worse.

Wouldn't it just be better to address the issues at hand that have created this air of insecurity? Build your community spirit to new highs, higher than ever before in the history of mankind. Really love your fellow man, not just your fellow Americans. Create a government you can trust. What's the point of having one if you're completely left out of anything good from it?

You can't trust that the "bad guys" will have bolt action rifles or single-shot firearms. You definitely can't trust the government to have your best interests at heart.

It's time to think about what you're leaving your grandchildren. It's not just about the here and now.

I hope to leave them a place where they can determine their own futures, where they have the responsibility for their own future and security.

A place where government doesn't make that decision for them.

reply to post by toocoolnc

---

To date, how many pro 2nd amendment people have used their guns against the goverment that they loudly proclaim are tyranical?

They don't, because for the most part from what I have seen, pro gun people are people that live in fear and paranoia...that is why they need their guns so badly, to make them feel safe. It's funny really, because these will be the last people to stand up to anybody.

Meanwhile, since they need their guns to make them feel safe, guns are so prevelant and easy to get that we have lunatics going around shooting innocent people in public places.

But hey, at least the gun owners feel "safe".

reply to post by SourGrapes

---

Can I have the names of those countries please? I'd like to check some facts, if you don't mind.

Here's the link to that law I mentioned: www.law.cornell.edu...

Originally posted by CosmicEgg
reply to post by SourGrapes

---

Can I have the names of those countries please? I'd like to check some facts, if you don't mind.

Here's the link to that law I mentioned: www.law.cornell.edu...

After reading the code, it makes me wonder how academic and or hypothetical discussions play into that law.

I mean it's one thing to start a group to actively plan an insurrection. It's another to say, "well in the event A, B, and/or C were to happen then I consider 1, 2, and/or 3"

Because essentially since this is a conspiracy THEORY site, and such discussions would fall under theory, and therefore generally are academic or hypothetical. And while I have seen a few statements here that are border line, they still are pretty much still in the realm of the hypothetical.

reply to post by SrWingCommander

---

Escalation, my friend. Nip it in the bud before people get the idea that they can actually do something within the law about this situation. They think they can bear arms to prevent a tyrannical government from overruling them. They cannot. They cannot either plot in any way, and I saw no disclaimer on hypothetical plotting there, against this regime. Note the language:

Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or

Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or

Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction. If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

As used in this section, the terms “organizes” and “organize”, with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.

In my view, it was time to set things out for the people here so we don't have the site shut down. I'm not a mod, obviously, but I don't know how closely they're watching.

If anyone is annoyed at this law, it's most definitely me. But it's just another nail in the coffin of American freedom - and it's why I don't live there anymore. No one is sadder about that than I am.

reply to post by CosmicEgg

---

The 2nd amendment says nothing about "tyrannical government", it only recognizes that citizens have the right to defend themselves and the government cannot try to take that away from them. So, I think that level of fear is better described by whomever is afraid (or rather, worried). What if some people feel the need to protect themselves from a giant spider invasion? Or hostile extraterrestrials? Or killer popscicles (but only the orange ones because let's face it, nobody likes those)? These fears might be irrational/improbable, but no one should argue that Americans don't have the right to defend themselves against threats to their freedom. We shouldn't equate gun culture with the right to gun ownership, but many do and it only serves the spirit of freedom. I'm pretty sure you have a right to shoes (maybe not constitutionally protected), what style and how many pairs you own is no concern of mine.

The point is, the Constitution is a framework for how the U.S. government should work. By pointing out the laws against sedition, you confuse the issue. The 2nd is clearly a case of/for defense; sedition is an aggressive act. Put it this way: if I go to my neighbor's home to attack him, I'm sure I'd be morally wrong. If he came to my home to attack me, he'd be liable.

reply to post by RCham

---

You got it, The right to bear arms is not purely for the citizens to protect themselves from a tyranical government. It is to protect themselves from any and all threats to their lives and livelihood. People keep claiming that the Second Amendment is purely to protect us from government when that is not the primary reason for it. It is purely for the right of every citizen to protect home and family from anything that might threaten them. America is a dangerous place. Not because of guns, because of bad people that will kick your door in and kill you, or kill you just for fun.

Read this story of kidnapping,torture (4 days) and murder for entertainment and tell me America is a safe place to be unarmed.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by RCham

---

Umm...you missed the point entirely. In bringing that law to the attention of the members here, I was merely trying to make everyone aware that there is a law whereby you really can't talk about overthrowing the government. You really can't. It wasn't about guns, it was about talking about getting rid of the government - something that has been pervasive in quite a few threads but has started escalating now with these rumors.

I think Americans feel they have a lot of freedom that a) they don't really have and b) we out here in the rest of the Western world also have and perhaps even more so. It's interesting that you all think you've got it all. You don't, and you're not even aware of it.

reply to post by CosmicEgg

---

Here is the problem with the second amendment.....
www.abovetopsecret.com...

UN Proposes Tax On Americans for 3rd world countries
  Posted 18 days ago with 28 member flags

Armed bystander stops stabbing outside school
  Posted 12 days ago with 27 member flags

Update...Canada Couple Wins Right To Grow Vegetables On Front Lawn...Case Closed!
  Posted 16 days ago with 25 member flags

We argue about Healthcare, meanwhile, the Elephant laughs (pls read!)
  Posted 13 days ago with 25 member flags

A new country in North America? What do Canadians and Americans make of this?
  Posted 9 days ago with 22 member flags

" Climate Change Is Not A Hoax", says Obama!!??
  Posted 4 days ago with 21 member flags

Former Arizona Sheriff Mack, ‘Gun Control Against the Law’
  Posted 13 days ago with 12 member flags

Limiting Freedom & It\'s Effects On Society
  Posted 17 days ago with 11 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: